Labour leadership: Result will be announced on 4 April [Post #1698]

[Technics 1210]

Don’t underestimate how many people are digital thinkers. Tories were for Brexit, so Labour must be for Remain. That’s how a lot of people think. There are only two positions to them - me and not-me, and anything they agree with because anchored onto the me people and what they disagree with becomes anchored onto not-me.

Additionally the 2017 manifesto was more credible and the AS scandal had not really bitten Labour.

Oligarchs at home and overseas distorted the referendum to suit their own ends and that is fundamentally undemocratic. Now you will see more and more power concentrated in very few hands while the influence of the courts is curtailed, Othering is used as a tool and we are well on the way to fascism.

I voted Labour for thirty years due to a commitment to social justice. I joined the LDs when it became clear to me that Labour were no longer seriously trying to get elected by choosing Corbyn. The pragmatic and capable left leaders of my youth were replaced by a not-very-bright messianic figure supported by a personality cult, so I was off.

Now I want to see a progressive alliance led by a moderate Labour leader supported by LD, Plaid and Greens work together for victory in 2024, then beat back the rising fascist tide.

The digital descion you refer to was only evident when the parties published their manifestos in 2019.

In 2017 the choice was simple:

Tories : Brexit means Brexit
Labour : Referendum result would be honoured.
LDs : Stop Brexit.

Labour in 2017 gained seats.

In 2019 the choice was simple

Tories : Get brexit done
Labour : 2nd referendum
LDs : stop brexit.

Tories win by landslide, Labour demolished, and LDs effective wiped out.

Labour changed its position on Brexit in 2019 and paid the price. LDs didn't learn from 2017. Nothing to do with AS given the reason people gave for not voting Labour were either Brexit position or Corbyn as a leader. AS wasn't even in the frame and even if it were, at best, it would effect one constituent.

Now if you think AS was a reason, then I put to you people voted Tories too because of Islamophobia in the party.

I too was a Labour supporter, but I have now lost faith in the Democratic system. They only time my vote mattered was in 2016, and the irony is, Remainers did not want to respect the true form of democracy while championing democracy.

Next 5 years will be interesting no doubt, and if Tories deliver on Brexit, and boost the economy, then my bet is that Boris will out run Thatcher.

 

[James]

I don’t think the electorate at large changed their vote on the basis of alleged Labour antisemitism or alleged Tory Islamophobia.

Brexit was key, and the botched triangulation attempts of Labour on this huge issue undoubtedly hurt them. They should have just stuck with honouring the referendum result and they might have kept the Red Wall at least - perhaps this would not have been enough to prevent the Tories from governing, or even to hang the Parliament - but it would have been a less hideous and less humiliating result from a Labour point of view, and they could have remained a strong party in opposition, holding the Tory Party to account and working to soften the passage of their more right-wing policies.

But the biggest factor of all this time was Jeremy Corbyn. In 2017 he was an exciting outsider, a relatively unknown quantity, and thus potentially a credible PM-in-waiting.

But as every opinion poll out there has found in the last 12 months or so, his brand has gradually mutated to the point where he has become the aggregated and confirmed least popular opposition leader in modern British history. Opinium also ran a post-election poll with traditional Labour voters who didn’t vote for them this time, and by far the biggest reason they did not do so was Jeremy Corbyn.

I read an analysis today that pinpointed the moment when Corbyn’s approval ratings began to slide - and they never recovered: it was when he produced an abysmally weak and oddly un-British response to the Skripal affair. This really made people think twice about where his loyalties truly belonged.

Rightly or wrongly, Jeremy Corbyn was ultimately perceived by the electorate as lacking in patriotism - someone who could not be trusted to safeguard our basic national security. This is why he was not chosen.

 

[Robert]

We should bomb, rape and kill everyone to make Labour great again - Mr Blair

Didn’t take you for a digital thinker Shazzer.

 

[Robert]

The digital descion you refer to was only evident when the parties published their manifestos in 2019.

In 2017 the choice was simple:

Tories : Brexit means Brexit
Labour : Referendum result would be honoured.
LDs : Stop Brexit.

Labour in 2017 gained seats.

In 2019 the choice was simple

Tories : Get brexit done
Labour : 2nd referendum
LDs : stop brexit.

Tories win by landslide, Labour demolished, and LDs effective wiped out.

Labour changed its position on Brexit in 2019 and paid the price. LDs didn't learn from 2017. Nothing to do with AS given the reason people gave for not voting Labour were either Brexit position or Corbyn as a leader. AS wasn't even in the frame and even if it were, at best, it would effect one constituent.

Now if you think AS was a reason, then I put to you people voted Tories too because of Islamophobia in the party.

I too was a Labour supporter, but I have now lost faith in the Democratic system. They only time my vote mattered was in 2016, and the irony is, Remainers did not want to respect the true form of democracy while championing democracy.

Next 5 years will be interesting no doubt, and if Tories deliver on Brexit, and boost the economy, then my bet is that Boris will out run Thatcher.

There is no point in us discussing this.

 

[Technics 1210]

There is no point in us discussing this.

Why? The difference between 2017 and 2019 Labour manifesto is clear. The policy on Brexit. The binary choice you refer to only applies to 2019. Even Corbyn admits he changed Labours position on Brexit to appease both sides of the Brexit debate.

Until you admit denying a democratic result before its implementation goes against everything democracy stands for, you will never realise why people voted for a Tory landslide victory.

 

[Captain caveman]

I get the unnerving feeling blair wants to be pm again. He is still young enough and if labour do not unite under a new leader and the europhiles/blairites keep causing problems, the worse nightmare could come true, with blair standing in a by election and winning and getting a seat in parliament and then challenging for the leadership.
Worrying times ahead!

 

[Robert]

I get the unnerving feeling blair wants to be pm again. He is still young enough and if labour do not unite under a new leader and the europhiles/blairites keep causing problems, the worse nightmare could come true, with blair standing in a by election and winning and getting a seat in parliament and then challenging for the leadership.
Worrying times ahead!

He would have to be accepted by a CLP somewhere. Then he would have to gain support from MPs, members and unions. The MPs would recognise his extremely high competence but I can’t see the members accepting him. His political capital burned in Iraq.

Time to look forward and find someone in the centre of the party. I expect masses of Corbynistas will just not renew membership.

 

[Robert]

Why? The difference between 2017 and 2019 Labour manifesto is clear. The policy on Brexit. The binary choice you refer to only applies to 2019. Even Corbyn admits he changed Labours position on Brexit to appease both sides of the Brexit debate.

Until you admit denying a democratic result before its implementation goes against everything democracy stands for, you will never realise why people voted for a Tory landslide victory.

Because evidence suggests that Corbyn was the biggest vote loser by far, and I am persuaded by evidence.

 

[Technics 1210]

Because evidence suggests that Corbyn was the biggest vote loser by far, and I am persuaded by evidence.

You are stating the obvious, of course he was the biggest vote loser, but why?

The evidence says Labour took the second referendum off the table thus honouring the result in 2017 and gained seats; Labour then added the second referendum in their 2019 manifesto and imploded despite having the same leadership team in 2017.

I'm not sure what evidence you are seeking here.

 

[Robert]

You are stating the obvious, of course he was the biggest vote loser, but why?

The evidence says Labour took the second referendum off the table thus honouring the result in 2017 and gained seats; Labour then added the second referendum in their 2019 manifesto and imploded despite having the same leadership team in 2017.

I'm not sure what evidence you are seeking here.

Why? Because he was up against better opposition this time. And the voters had two more years to suss him out. His student union level understanding of the world. His unfeasible spending plan, his failure to stamp out antiSemitism, his willingness to side with any cause opposed to the UK and in particular his behaviour after the Salisbury attack.

This says it better than me:

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/dec/22/labour-has-no-hope-of-rebuilding-unless-it-breaks-cold-grip-of-the-hard-left

 

[Technics 1210]

Why? Because he was up against better opposition this time. And the voters had two more years to suss him out. His student union level understanding of the world. His unfeasible spending plan, his failure to stamp out antiSemitism, his willingness to side with any cause opposed to the UK and in particular his behaviour after the Salisbury attack.

This says it better than me:

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/dec/22/labour-has-no-hope-of-rebuilding-unless-it-breaks-cold-grip-of-the-hard-left

From the article:

Another favoured Corbynite alibi is Brexit. It is true that Brexit placed great stress on Labour’s electoral coalition. The test of leadership was to manage those strains successfully. The fractures were instead made more acute because the leader was a furtive Brexiter whose unwillingness to pick a side reinforced the other doubts about his fitness to be prime minister. Labour’s vote fell in Leave seats. It also went down in Remain seats. We should not forget that the Conservatives’ electoral coalition was also stressed by Brexit. Recall that 21 Remainer Tory MPs were purged for rebelling before the election. The Conservatives won because they kept most of their vote together while also taking support off Labour. Millions of Tory Remainers backed Boris Johnson when they might have done something different had Labour been under more appealing and less scary leadership. As much as many of them found Brexit appalling, these critical voters found the idea of a Corbynite government even more repulsive.

------

As for AS, Tories didn't do much to stamp out Islamophobia but still received votes. I don't think AS had much to do with it.

 

[Robert]

From the article:

Another favoured Corbynite alibi is Brexit. It is true that Brexit placed great stress on Labour’s electoral coalition. The test of leadership was to manage those strains successfully. The fractures were instead made more acute because the leader was a furtive Brexiter whose unwillingness to pick a side reinforced the other doubts about his fitness to be prime minister. Labour’s vote fell in Leave seats. It also went down in Remain seats. We should not forget that the Conservatives’ electoral coalition was also stressed by Brexit. Recall that 21 Remainer Tory MPs were purged for rebelling before the election. The Conservatives won because they kept most of their vote together while also taking support off Labour. Millions of Tory Remainers backed Boris Johnson when they might have done something different had Labour been under more appealing and less scary leadership. As much as many of them found Brexit appalling, these critical voters found the idea of a Corbynite government even more repulsive.

You appear to be agreeing with me that Corbyn was the big turn-off, not Labour's Brexit policy.

------

As for AS, Tories didn't do much to stamp out Islamophobia but still received votes. I don't think AS had much to do with it.

It did for Jewish voters.

Ask yourself why Labour support might be hurt by constant stories of institutional party racism, but Tory support won't be.

 

[Technics 1210]

You appear to be agreeing with me that Corbyn was the big turn-off, not Labour's Brexit policy.

------


It did for Jewish voters.

Ask yourself why Labour support might be hurt by constant stories of institutional party racism, but Tory support won't be.

Nope, I am saying Labour imploded due to their Brexit position, whereas you didn't mention Brexit in your previous post as a cause.

As for AS, I asked you how many seats labour would lose due to AS, you said 1 (seat in North London). You assume the nation cares about AS, I think this is simply not true.

Brexit was a deciding factor. Even LDs lost a seat because of their Brexit position.

All I am saying is this 2019 election was about Brexit, in fact, the election was called because of lack of progress on brexit 3.5 years after the referendum.

You must understand that denying a democratic result before its implementation is undemocratic, and thankfully people in the UK value democracy above party politics.

 

[MenInG]

Jeremy Corbyn has urged Labour to lead "the resistance" to Boris Johnson's Tory government over the coming year despite its crushing election defeat.

In his New Year message, the party's leader said it faced tough times ahead after its fourth defeat in a row but its movement remained "very strong".

He said there was "no other choice" but to continue the fight against poverty, inequality and climate change.

He will stand down once a new leader has been elected early in 2020.

Spoiler

A number of senior Labour politicians have said they are considering entering the race to succeed him, in a contest due to begin in earnest later this month.

The early contenders include Rebecca Long-Bailey, Emily Thornberry, Keir Starmer, Lisa Nandy and Clive Lewis - while Angela Rayner, Yvette Cooper, Jess Phillips, David Lammy and Ian Lavery could also put themselves forward if they secure enough support.

Most have refrained from direct criticism of Mr Corbyn's leadership although many of the 59 Labour MPs who lost their seats in the party's worst electoral performance since 1935 have accused him of failing to take personal responsibility.

In his traditional leader's New Year message, Mr Corbyn makes no direct reference to the election result or his own future, suggesting 2019 had been "quite the year for our country and for our Labour movement".

While the party is set to be out of power for at least another four years, he said it must continue to make its influence felt and stand up for its values.

"It won't be easy," he said. "But we have built a movement. We are the resistance to Boris Johnson. We will be campaigning every day. We will be on the front line, both in Parliament and on the streets."

He said Labour's priorities must be to ensure the NHS remains free to all at the point of use, preventing the climate crisis causing "irreparable damage" at home and abroad and working with "movements and parties seeking social justice and change all over the world".

"Make no mistake, our movement is very strong... we're not backed by the press barons, by the billionaires or by the millionaires who work for the billionaires. We're backed by you. We are by the many, for the many.

"2020 and the years ahead will be tough - no one is saying otherwise. But we're up for the fight, to protect what we hold dear, and to build to win and to transform. The fight continues. There is no other choice."

With the contest to succeed him expected to take about three months, Mr Corbyn is set to continue leading the party in Parliament and the country until the spring. The party has no deputy leader, with Tom Watson having stood down at the election.

Mr Johnson, who is currently on holiday in the Caribbean, is also expected to issue a New Year message to the country in the coming days.

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-50945597

 

[MenInG]

Richard Burgon, who has been an MP in Leeds since 2015, has said he will stand to be Labour's deputy leader.

In a tweet he wrote: "After a break and discussion with MPs and party members, I'm announcing that I'm standing to be Labour's Deputy Leader."

Meanwhile, Jess Phillips MP has tweeted a cryptic message which reads: "2020 watch this space."

Mr Burgon wrote in a recent article that thinks it is a mistake to focus blame on Jeremy Corbyn for the party's dire performance in the general election.

He went on to pay tribute to Mr Corbyn, saying "nobody campaigned with greater energy, resilience and principle" and that all members of the shadow cabinet should accept responsibility for losing so many seats.

He said he wants to regain the trust of the electorate, and to rebrand the party as the champion of the whole working class "whether in towns and cities, whether Remain or Leave".

He called for a "special commission" to investigate what went wrong for Labour in Leave-voting seats before focusing on 10 of the party's key manifesto policies as a "vision of hope against the cruelty that will come from the Johnson government".

He added that Brexit became an "issue of trust" and the failure to "get it done" meant that many people simple did not believe Labour would able to deliver on "our ambitious manifesto", and that to rebuild Labour, the party "must be the champion of the whole working-class".

https://news.sky.com/story/richard-burgon-mp-will-stand-to-be-labours-deputy-leader-11898747

 

[Robert]

Nope, I am saying Labour imploded due to their Brexit position, whereas you didn't mention Brexit in your previous post as a cause.

As for AS, I asked you how many seats labour would lose due to AS, you said 1 (seat in North London). You assume the nation cares about AS, I think this is simply not true.

I would like to think that most of us are better people than that.

Brexit was a deciding factor. Even LDs lost a seat because of their Brexit position.

Not quite. The LDs went from 7% of the vote in 2017 to 11.3% in 2019 but lost a seat anyway. Without the disastrous Revoke position I think LDs would have have 18% of the vote and thirty MPs now.

All I am saying is this 2019 election was about Brexit, in fact, the election was called because of lack of progress on brexit 3.5 years after the referendum.

You must understand that denying a democratic result before its implementation is undemocratic, and thankfully people in the UK value democracy above party politics.

If I felt a democratic result had been reached, I would agree. But an unbinding referendum where the regulator had no power, which would have been overturned by the regulator if binding - no.

 

[MenInG]

The shadow Brexit secretary Sir Keir Starmer has confirmed he will run to be the next Labour leader - becoming the fifth MP to enter the race.

Sir Keir ended weeks of speculation with the announcement, and will launch his leadership bid on Sunday in Stevenage.

He has been a vocal supporter of Remain during his time as an MP, and has chosen the Hertfordshire town, which voted 59% to leave the EU, to start his campaign to succeed Jeremy Corbyn.

Mr Corbyn said he would stand down from the Labour Party after it suffered its worst general election defeat since 1935 in the December election.

Sir Keir joins Lisa Nandy, Jess Phillips, Clive Lewis and Emily Thornberry as the fifth MP running for the role.

A poll for Sky News earlier this week indicated Sir Keir would win the leadership - defeating Rebecca Long-Bailey, who is yet to confirm whether she will run.

Writing in the Sunday Mirror, Sir Keir said: "Over the coming weeks, I'm looking forward to getting back on the campaign trail and talking to people from across the country about how Labour can rebuild and win.

"Britain desperately needs a Labour government. We need a Labour government that will offer people hope of a better future.

"However, that is only going to happen if Labour listens to people about what needs to change and how we can restore trust in our party as a force for good."

In his letter, he said he knew how much "Labour supporters are hurting" and talked of "untold damage Boris Johnson will to do our country over the next five years".

He continued by saying Labour must "rebuild and fast" including restoring trust in the party.

Sir Keir's Remain stance was blamed by some of Mr Corbyn's allies for the party's disastrous results in the election, but he will urge members not to lurch to the right, saying the case for a "bold and radical" Labour government is as important as ever.

The human rights lawyer, who was made Queen's Counsel in 2002 and served of head of the Crown Prosecution Service, accepted a knighthood in 2014 and has struggled to shake off perceptions of privilege.

But he has cited his upbringing by his toolmaker father and nurse mother in Southwark, south London, in defence of his working class roots. He was also named after Labour's founder Keir Hardie.

He became MP for Holborn and St Pancras in 2015.

In a campaign film released on Saturday evening, Sir Keir highlighted his work in the Stephen Lawrence campaign, with Baroness Lawrence calling him "instrumental" in getting justice for her murdered son.

His work with the National Union of Mineworkers and in the McLibel case against McDonald's is also highlighted.

Critics of Sir Keir have been concerned he is seen as too much of a Londoner, but that does not appear to have affected his polling in December, which showed he would take the final round of voting with 61%.

Wigan MP Ms Nandy began her campaign in her constituency on Saturday, calling for a change to Mr Corbyn's approach.

She said: "We need a different sort of leadership that helps to root us back in every community across the UK, turns us back into a real movement and real force, driven from the ground up so that we can win people's trust back."

Meanwhile Ms Phillips visited Bury North, which the Tories picked up in the 12 December election, to meet former supporters of the party.

Senior Labour MP David Lammy responded to the numerous calls to run in the leadership campaign by ruling himself out, suggesting he was not the person to unite the "vociferous factions".

https://news.sky.com/story/labour-l...nounces-bid-to-replace-jeremy-corbyn-11901236

 

[MenInG]

The contest for the new Labour leader will formally begin on Tuesday with the winner announced on 4 April, the party's ruling body has decided.

Those who join the party or become affiliated supporters before 20 January will be eligible to vote.

Registered supporters - who are not full party members - will have 48 hours from 14-16 January to secure a vote by paying £25.

Five MPs have so far entered the running to succeed Jeremy Corbyn.

Clive Lewis, Lisa Nandy, Jess Phillips, Sir Keir Starmer and Emily Thornberry are all in contention.

A sixth contender, shadow business secretary Rebecca Long Bailey, is also expected to throw her hat into the ring. She is close to Mr Corbyn's inner circle and represented Labour in an election TV debate.

A party spokeswoman said: "We want as many of our members and supporters to take part, so it has been designed to be open, fair and democratic."

The first parliamentary Labour Party hustings will be held on Tuesday with a similar event for deputy leadership candidates on Wednesday.

How will the leadership race unfold?
7-13 January: Nomination period for MPs and MEPs
14-16 January: Application period for registered supporters
15 January - 14 February: Second stage of nominations from Constituency Labour Parties (CLP) and affiliates, including unions
20 January: Freeze date for voting eligibility for new members and affiliated supporters
21 February: Ballot opens
2 April: Ballot closes
4 April: Special conference to announce results
More than 500,000 people took part in the last leadership contest, when Mr Corbyn was re-elected in 2016.

He signalled his intention to stand down last month after Labour lost its fourth general election in a row and his second as leader. His successor will be in place before council and mayoral elections at the start of May.

Labour hopefuls address trust and Brexit issues
Who will be Labour's next leader?
A new deputy leader also has to be elected after Tom Watson stepped down in December and Labour's National Executive Committee (NEC) also set the rules for that contest.

Shadow education secretary Angela Rayner launched her candidacy for deputy in Stockport earlier.

She said she would be backing friend and flat-mate Ms Long Bailey if she chose to run for the top job.

Shadow justice secretary Richard Burgon, shadow equalities minister Dawn Butler and shadow Europe minister Khalid Mahmood have also confirmed they intend to run for the post of deputy.

In order to take part, leadership candidates need the support of at least 22 MPs and MEPs, as well as the backing of at least 5% of constituency parties or three affiliated bodies - two of which must be trade unions.

One of the key issues decided during the meeting was the cut-off period for membership.

In 2016, the cut-off date was set retrospectively, but this time the NEC voted to stick with the time frame set out in Labour's rulebook, meaning those who want to join and vote now have two weeks to sign up.

This is potentially helpful to Birmingham Yardley MP Ms Phillips and Ms Nandy, MP for Wigan. Both are looking to attract new members to join and vote for them, and to persuade former supporters - who became disillusioned about the party's direction under Mr Corbyn - to return to the fold.

In contrast, those contenders who appear to be more popular with the current left-wing and pro-Remain membership, such as shadow Brexit secretary Sir Keir, were likely to have benefitted from a more restricted timetable.

MEPs will still be able to nominate candidates event though by the end of the race they are likely to be out of a job given the UK looks set to leave the EU on 31 January.

Fee rise
The NEC also decided the rules around the participation of registered supporters.

Since 2015, non-party members have been able to sign up temporarily at a reduced cost to cast a vote. When Mr Corbyn first became leader in 2015, people were given two months to sign up for a small fee of £3.

A year later - when he was challenged by Owen Smith - the NEC gave them just two days and the fee went up to £25.

However, more people signed up in 2016, with about 120,000 registered supporters ultimately taking part.

The NEC is an elected body made of up parliamentarians, councillors, trade unionists and constituency party members.


https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-51000133

 

[The Viper]

Opposition to Jeremy Corbyn 'hindered' anti-Semitism action, claims report

Spoiler

Anti-Jeremy Corbyn sentiment within Labour hindered the party from tackling anti-Semitism, says a leaked report.

The internal party document said an "abnormal intensity of factional opposition" to the former leader "inhibited the proper functioning" of the party and its complaints procedure.

But it also said Labour was "ill-equipped" and did not act fast enough.

The Campaign Against Anti-Semitism said the report was leaked as an attempt to "smear whistleblowers".

It is understood the document - dated March 2020 - is a draft drawn up to help inform the party's responses to an investigation by the Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC).

The watchdog launched a probe into anti-Semitism within Labour in May 2019 after a complaint from the Campaign Against Anti-Semitism.

A Labour spokesman said the party had submitted "extensive information to the EHRC and responded to questions and requests for further information" - but none of that detail was included in the leaked report.

The party's new leader and deputy, Sir Keir Starmer and Angela Rayner, said the leaking of the document and some of its content - such as conversations between staff -"raised a number of matters of serious concern".

They said they would launch an urgent investigation into why the report was commissioned, its contents, and how it ended up in the public domain.

The leaked document said Labour's latest investigation into anti-Semitism in the party revealed "a litany of mistakes, deficiencies, and missed opportunities to reform, develop and adapt a clearly failing disciplinary system", and "disproved any suggestion that anti-Semitism is not a problem in the party".

It also said the "rigorous and far-reaching reforms necessary to bring the party's procedures up to standard were not undertaken early enough".

However, the document claimed the "extremely strained relationship" between Mr Corbyn and Labour headquarters during his tenure had stopped oversight "over the disciplinary process", with the party's management being "generally more obstructive than it was constructive".

It included transcripts of WhatsApp messages between staff, which it said showed opposition to Mr Corbyn, and said, at the extreme, some seemed to have "taken a view that the worse things got for Labour, the happier they would be since this might expedite Jeremy Corbyn's departure from office".

The report claimed to have found "no evidence" of anti-Semitism complaints being handled differently to other forms of complaint, and said that in 2019, half of all anti-Semitism complaints came from a "one individual" who the reports accuses of being "rude and abusive" to party staff.

It also claimed there had been a "steady, if imperfect, rate of improvement" after Mr Corbyn's ally, Jennie Formby, took over as general secretary from the former post holder, Ian McNicol.

'Last-ditch attempt'

The document praised measures taken by Mr Corbyn since 2018, including the introduction of fast track expulsions, describing the moves as "transformational".

It added: "These safeguards ensure that the past mistakes in the handling of anti-Semitism complaints cannot be repeated now."

But the Campaign Against Anti-Semitism, which reported Labour to the EHRC, said the report "serves as an exhibit of the party's failure to address the crisis" and should be handed over to the watchdog.

The organisation's chief executive, Gideon Falter, said: "In the dying days of Jeremy Corbyn's leadership, the Labour Party appears to have invested in a desperate last-ditch attempt to deflect and discredit allegations of anti-Semitism.

"Rather than properly dealing with cases of anti-Semitism and the culture of anti-Jewish racism that prevailed during Mr Corbyn's tenure, the party has instead busied itself trawling through 10,000 of its own officials' e-mails and WhatsApp messages in an attempt to imagine a vast anti-Corbyn conspiracy and to continue its effort to smear whistleblowers."

Momentum - the group originally set up to back
Mr Corbyn as Labour leader - has called on his successor, Sir Keir Starmer, to announce a full inquiry into the report.

Ongoing row

Labour has been plagued with allegations since 2016.

Mr Corbyn held an internal investigation early on in his tenure, but it was widely criticised by Jewish members of the party, with a number - including MPs - leaving over his handling of the row.

The party's new leader, Sir Keir Starmer, has apologised to the Jewish community for the ongoing issue.

He has been praised by leaders for "achieving more in four days" than Mr Corbyn did "in four years" on tackling anti-Semitism.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-52271317

 

[Robert]

So what do we think of Sir Keir? He is making Johnson look a complete amateur at the dispatch box. I dialed in to a Zoom meeting he held, to find out what people think of Labour down my way.

 

[Robert]

Rebecca Long-Bailey has been sacked from Labour's shadow cabinet after sharing an article that "contained an antisemitic conspiracy theory".

"This afternoon Keir Starmer asked Rebecca Long-Bailey to step down from the shadow cabinet," a spokesman for the Labour leader said.

"The article Rebecca shared earlier today contained an antisemitic conspiracy theory.

"As Leader of the Labour Party, Keir has been clear that restoring trust with the Jewish community is a number one priority.

"Antisemitism takes many different forms and it is important that we all are vigilant against it."

Ms Long-Bailey, who stood in the race to replace Jeremy Corbyn, was chosen by Sir Keir to be shadow education secretary when he became leader in April.

Sky News understands a campaign group of left-wing Labour MPs have requested a meeting with Sir Keir Starmer about the dismissal but their request was declined.

Ms Long-Bailey's sacking comes after she shared, on Twitter, an interview with the actress Maxine Peake, describing her as an "absolute diamond".

In the interview, Ms Peake claimed the US police linked to the killing of George Floyd had learned their tactics from the Israeli secret services.

After attracting criticism for her tweet, Ms Long-Bailey said she "retweeted Maxine Peake's article because of her significant achievements and because the thrust of her argument is to stay in the Labour Party".

She added: "It wasn't intended to be an endorsement of all aspects of the article."

In a series of messages after her sacking was announced, Ms Long-Bailey said she shared the article from "my constituent and stalwart Labour Party supporter Maxine Peake" because "its main thrust was anger with the Conservative government's handling of the current emergency and a call for Labour Party unity".

She added: "These sentiments are shared by everyone in our movement and millions of people in our country.

"I learned that many people were concerned by references to international sharing of training and restraint techniques between police and security forces.

"In no way was my retweet an intention to endorse every part of that article."

Ms Long-Bailey said she wanted to "acknowledge these concerns and duly issued a clarification of my retweet", which was agreed in advance with Sir Keir's office.

"But after posting I was subsequently instructed to take both this agreed clarification and my original retweet down," she said.

"I could not do this in good conscience without the issuing of a press statement of clarification.

"I had asked to discuss these matters with Keir before agreeing what further action to take, but sadly he had already made his decision."

Ms Long-Bailey, who became MP for Salford and Eccles in 2015, said she would "continue to support the Labour Party in parliament under Keir Starmer's leadership, to represent the people of Salford and Eccles and work towards a more equal, peaceful and sustainable world".

Labour MP Dame Margaret Hodge, who is Jewish, tweeted: "This is what a change in culture looks like. This is what zero tolerance looks like. This is what rebuilding trust with the Jewish community looks like."

Marie van der Zyl, president of the Board of Deputies of British Jews, thanked Sir Keir for his "swift action" and said he was "backing his words with actions on antisemitism".

Jonathan Goldstein, chair of the Jewish Leadership Council, said Sir Keir's "decisive leadership and firm action" shows "he understands the severity and harm that antisemitic conspiracies do to our politics".

But John McDonnell, who was shadow chancellor under Mr Corbyn, made clear that he disagreed with the decision.

"Throughout discussion of antisemitism it's always been said criticism of practices of Israeli state is not antisemitic," he said.

"I don't believe therefore that this article is or ⁦⁦@RLong_Bailey should've been sacked. I stand in solidarity with her.

https://news.sky.com/story/sir-keir...ntisemitic-conspiracy-theory-article-12014698